Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Nov 18;20(11):e0336033. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0336033

Epidemiological trends in alcoholic cardiomyopathy burden: A 32-year global and Chinese analysis (1990–2021) with projections to 2036

Fei Yan 1,2,3,#, Changfen Wang 3,#, Jiulin Chen 3, Zhaoxing Cao 1,2, Runze Huang 1,2,*, Zhangrong Chen 1,2,*
Editor: Amir Hossein Behnoush4
PMCID: PMC12626323  PMID: 41252444

Abstract

Background: Alcoholic cardiomyopathy (ACM), a preventable yet overlooked cardiomyopathy subtype, disproportionately affects chronic alcohol users through alcohol-induced myocardial damage. Characterized by delayed clinical onset, ACM typically manifests as irreversible heart failure in middle age (45-69 years), creating missed opportunities for early intervention. Despite global cardiovascular mortality declines, ACM burden continues rising paradoxically in certain middle-high income countries like China, revealing gaps in current prevention strategies. This study systematically evaluates ACM’s global burden through prevalence, mortality and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) metrics, using WHO-standardized methods to characterize spatiotemporal patterns across global, national, and subnational strata.

Methods: We utilized the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 methodological framework to estimate the age-standardized rates (ASRs) of prevalenceand, mortality and DALYs for ACM. These estimates were stratified across key demographic dimensions including: Age groups (15-95+ years), Sex, Geographical regions (21 GBD-defined regions), the Socio-Demographic Index (SDI) quintiles, 204 countries and territories during the observation period 1990-2021. Furthermore, we employed Bayesian Age-Period-Cohort (BAPC) modeling with integrated nested Laplace approximations to project disease burden trajectories through 2036, incorporating uncertainty quantification via Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations.

Results: Globally, ACM burden showed significant declines from 1990 to 2021, with age-standardized rates decreasing by 22.5-37.1% across prevalence, mortality and disability measures. However, China experienced a 200.4% case increase during this period, with rising mortality and disability rates contrary to global trends. The disease disproportionately affected males and middle-aged adults (45-69 years), with pronounced regional disparities in middle-high SDI areas. While population growth primarily drove disability-adjusted life year (DALY) increases, these regions also showed greatest potential for burden reduction through targeted interventions. Projections suggest continued global declines but only modest improvements in China through 2036.

Conclusion: In 2021, ACM remained a significant global health burden, particularly affecting middle-aged and elderly populations with distinct demographic disparities. This study identified three critical issues: China’s unique epidemiological patterns, optimal intervention timing for high-risk populations, and sex-specific pathogenic mechanisms. Future research should prioritize developing precision prevention strategies for high-burden regions, including population-based alcohol control policies, early screening programs (especially for males aged 45-69), and personalized secondary prevention measures. Middle-high SDI regions warrant particular attention as priority intervention areas requiring cost-effectiveness implementation studies.

Introduction

Alcoholic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is a progressive myocardial disorder caused by chronic excessive alcohol consumption and has become a major etiological contributor to heart failure [1]. Its pathogenesis involves multifactorial interactions, including direct alcohol toxicity to cardiomyocytes, oxidative stress, inflammatory activation, and neurohormonal dysregulation [2]. While traditional views attributed alcohol-related diseases like alcoholic fatty liver disease solely to drinking behavior, emerging evidence highlights the critical role of genetic susceptibility. For instance, patatin-like phospholipase domain-containing protein 3 (PNPLA3) variants are significantly associated not only with hepatic disorders but also with diabetes, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, and related cardiovascular events. Similarly, 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 13 (HSD17B13 ) variants participate in regulating metabolic disturbances and cardiovascular injury [3]. Global 2019 data indicated an ACM prevalence of 8.51 per 100,000 (about 710,000 cases) [4], yet high-risk groups (e.g., alcoholics carrying risk genotypes) exhibited prevalence rates up to 40%. Rising case numbers linked to changing drinking patterns (particularly among young males) [5] and pronounced geographical disparities—with Eastern European countries bearing the heaviest burden (>15/100,000) [6] while Asia-Pacific regions show lower current prevalence—suggest that ACM development results from interactions between environmental exposure and genetic background, ultimately triggering cardiomyocyte apoptosis, myocardial hypertrophy, and pathological ventricular remodeling that progress to heart failure and complications [7,8]. Consequently, ACM control strategies must simultaneously address individual variability (genetic predisposition), drinking patterns, and regional heterogeneity, necessitating evidence-based prevention policies and optimized resource allocation globally [9]. This study employs global burden of disease (GBD) 2021 data to quantify ACM’s epidemiological triad (prevalence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years), addressing three key questions: (1) How does ACM burden evolve temporo-spatially amid global alcohol consumption shifts? (2) Which demographic features (age/sex/Socio-demographic Index) identify high-risk subgroups? (3) How can prevention strategies be optimized for precision interventions—particularly in developing nations undergoing drinking norm transitions like China?

Methods

Data source

The GBD 2021 study provides comprehensive epidemiological estimates for 369 diseases across 204 countries and 21 regions, stratified by five Socio-Demographic Index (SDI) categories from 1990 to 2021. To ensure data validity, GBD implemented a triangulated validation protocol: (1) Cross-verification between source data and DISMOD-MR 2.1 models (discrepancy threshold <15%); (2) Uncertainty quantification through 1000 bootstrap iterations generating 95% UIs; (3) Expert review of outliers by Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) clinical panels. Age-standardized rates (ASRs) for prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) were calculated using the WHO standard population. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were derived from log-linear regression models. Stratified analyses examined variations across geography, sex, calendar years, and age groups (15–95 years).

Ethical compliance statement: This study utilized publicly available, de-identified aggregate data from the GBD 2021, no individual patient data were accessed. In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki provisions for secondary data analysis, ethical approval was not required. This study utilized exclusively de-identified aggregate data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (GBD 2021), publicly accessible through the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) portal (http://ghdx.healthdata.org/). Per Article 32 of the Declaration of Helsinki (2013) governing secondary analysis of anonymized public data, and in accordance with our Institutional Review Board’s exemption criteria, ethics approval was waived since no individual patient data or identifiers were accessed.

Definition

ACM [10]

(1) Heavy alcohol consumption (>80g/day) for at least 5 years.

(2) Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter>2 SD above normal and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%.

(3) Exclusion of other causes of DCM, including hypertensive, valvular,and ischaemic heart disease (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Diagnostic criteria for Alcoholic cardiomyopathy.

Fig 1

By Figdraw.com.

SDI

The SDI serves as a composite metric for evaluating the sociodevelopmental status of various countries and regions. It is derived by computing the geometric mean of three distinct indicators: per capita income, the total fertility rate for women below the age of 25, and the mean years of education for individuals aged 15 and older [11]. SDI scores range from 0 (lowest development) to 1 (highest development). Based on these scores, countries are classified into five development tiers: low SDI (0.000 - 0.455), low-middle SDI (0.456 - 0.608), middle SDI (0.609 - 0.690), high-middle SDI (0.691 - 0.805), and high SDI (0.806 - 1.000). Detailed country-level SDI classifications are available through the (IHME) at http://ghdx.healthdata.org/.

DALYs

DALYs are a standardized metric for quantifying disease burden, representing the total number of healthy life years lost due to premature mortality and non-fatal health conditions. This composite measure comprises two core components: 1. Years of Life Lost (YLLs) calculated by multiplying the number of deaths by the reference life expectancy at the age of death; 2. Years Lived with Disability (YLDs) determined by multiplying the number of incident/prevalent cases by a disability weight (0 = full health, 1 = death) and duration of the condition.One DALY equates to the loss of one year of full health. The formula is expressed as: DALY = YLL + YLD.

ASR

The ASR is a statistical metric that modifies the observed rates to accurately represent a population characterized by a uniform age distribution, enabling valid comparisons between populations with differing age distributions. This standardization process converts crude rates based on a population’s actual age composition into adjusted rates using weights derived from a standard reference population’s age distribution and the ASR (per 100,000 people) is calculated as follow:

ASR=i=1Aaiwii=1Awi×100000 (1)

Among them, ai denotes the specific age ratio for the ith group, while wi represents either the population size or the assigned weight fot the ith group within the selected reference standard population.

EAPC

The Estimated Annual Percentage Change (EAPC) is a statistical measure quantifying temporal trends in ASRs over a defined period. Calculated as:

EAPC=100×[exp(β)1]. (2)

where β represents the slope coefficient from a linear regression model of the natural logarithm of ASR against time, this metric provides both the magnitude and direction of rate changes. The associated 95% UI, derived from the regression model’s confidence limits, enables trend classification:(1). Declining trend: EAPC and 95% UI upper bound < 0; (2). Rising trend: EAPC and 95% UI lower bound >0.(3). Stable trend: 95% UI = 0. The absolute EAPC value reflects the rate of change magnitude, with statistical significance determined at p < 0.05 [12]. This method is particularly valuable for analyzing long-term disease incidence or mortality patterns in epidemiological studies.

Methods and statistical analyses

This study comprehensively assessed ACM’s global disease burden through descriptive epidemiology. We calculated crude and ASRs of prevalence, mortality, and DALYs. Stratified temporal trends (1990-2021) were visualized via sex-specific, regional, and national comparisons using multivariate techniques (heatmaps, time-series plots).Leveraging GBD 2021 data, we implemented:1.Joinpoint regression: Identified significant trend inflection points;2.Bayesian Age-Period-Cohort (BAPC) modeling: Age effects: Life-stage risk variations Period effects: Population-wide temporal shifts Cohort effects: Birth cohort lifetime risks (Computed via Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation (INLA), replacing MCMC to accelerate convergence from weeks to hours with <0.1% error); 3.Age-Period-Cohort ( APC ) analysis: Cohort effect estimation; 4.Stochastic frontier analysis: Healthcare efficiency assessment; 5.Concentration index: Health inequality quantification; All analyses used R 4.4.2. Bayesian posterior distributions yielded point estimates + 95% UIs; statistical significance required two-tailed p<0.05.

Results

1. Burden profiles: China vs Global (1990–2021)

1.1 Prevalence.

China demonstrated a sharply diverging trajectory from global patterns: age-standardized prevalence rates (ASPRs) tripled (+200.4%, 95% UI: 171.3 to 230.5) since 1990, reaching 1.6 per 100,000 (95% UI: 1.2 to 1.9) in 2021 and elevating China to the upper-medium global burden tier. Conversely, global ASPRs declined by 22.5% (95% UI: -26.6 to -18.2) to 6.2 per 100,000 (95% UI: 5.1 to 7.4). Extreme regional disparities were observed: Eastern Europe recorded the highest ASPRs (62.5 per 100,000, 95% UI: 51.9 to 75.0) versus near-absence in Andean Latin America (95% UI: 0 to 0.1) (Table 1; S1 Table). Critically, China’s accelerated growth (EAPC = 4.79, 95% UI: 4.30 to 5.29) significantly deviated from the global downward trend (EAPC = –0.59, 95% UI: -0.83 to -0.35), indicating unique epidemiological drivers (Table 1; S1 Table)

Table 1. Prevalent cases, deaths, and DALYs for ACM in 2021, and percentage change in ASRs per 100 000, by GBD region, from 1990 to 2021 (generated from data available at https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool).
2021 1990-2021 2021 1990-2021 2021 1990-2021
Prevalence(95%UI) Deaths(95%UI) DALYs(95%UI)
Location No, in (95%UI) ASRs per 100000 (95%UI) Percentage change in ASRs from 1990to2021 EAPC No, in (95%UI) No, in (95%UI) ASRs per 100000 (95%UI) Percentage change in ASRs from 1990to2021 EAPC No, in (95%UI) No, in (95%UI) ASRs per 100000 (95%UI) Percentage change in ASRs from 1990to2021 EAPC No, in (95%UI)
Global 528429 (439582.3 to 639167.4) 6.2 (5.1 to 7.4) -22.5 (-26.6 to -18.2) -0.59 (-0.83 to -0.35) 64011.4 (56292.6 to 69518.7) 0.741 (0.652 to 0.805) -37.1 (-42.9 to -31.7) -1.72 (-2.74 to -0.7) 2185527.6 (1928589.3 to 2368735.7) 25.3 (22.4 to 27.5) -29.3 (-35.3 to -23.7) -1.44 (-2.61 to -0.27)
China 28103.4 (22175.4 to 34990.7) 1.6(1.2 to 1.9) 200.4 (171.3 to 230.5) 4.79 (4.3 to 5.29) 1861 (317.6 to 2986.8) 0.096 (0.017 to 0.152) 80.3 (-43.2 to 261.7) 2.67 (2.34 to 3) 64745.9 (12595.5 to 102876.1) 3.4 (0.7 to 5.4) 90.2 (-34.4 to 274.9) 2.91(2.59 to 3.22)
High-income Asia Pacific 13148.4 (10795.1 to 16170.6) 5 (4 to 6.1) -25.8 (-32.1 to -18.5) -1.19 (-1.28 to -1.1) 489.1 (442.6 to 532.4) 0.13 (0.118 to 0.141) -60.4 (-64.2 to -55.9) -3.29 (-3.39 to -3.19) 13652.5 (12385.9 to 14806.5) 4.5 (4.1 to 4.8) -61 (-64.7 to -56.6) -3.33 (-3.43 to -3.23)
High-income North America 89214.3 (74203.6 to 108043.5) 17.4 (14.6 to 20.9) -11.7 (-19.4 to -1.6) -0.49 (-0.6 to -0.38) 6014.8 (5590.1 to 6391.3) 1.014 (0.947 to 1.078) -28 (-35.4 to -20.3) -1.22 (-1.43 to -1.02) 177117.9 (166935.4 to 187218) 32.9 (31 to 34.7) -24.6 (-30.9 to -17.3) -0.98 (-1.14 to -0.81)
Western Europe 88260.6 (71202.7 to 108293.2) 13.4 (11 to 16.1) -2.4 (-9.8 to 6) 0.53 (0.12 to 0.95) 4939.3 (4446.4 to 5379.1) 0.59 (0.536 to 0.638) -61.5 (-66.9 to -56.3) -3.3 (-3.54 to -3.07) 127835.8 (116945.2 to 137643.6) 17.6 (16.2 to 18.9) -58.9 (-64.2 to -53.7) -3.07 (-3.34 to -2.81)
Australasia 11895.7 (9653 to 14308.5) 26.6 (21.8 to 31.8) 98.5 (76.7 to 123.2) 2.2 (1.73 to 2.67) 433.4 (401.7 to 468.7) 0.885 (0.825 to 0.957) -27.7 (-35.6 to -18.9) -0.96 (-1.5 to -0.42) 12459.2 (11570.5 to 13526.5) 28.2 (26.2 to 30.6) -20.7 (-28.8 to -10.7) -0.64 (-1.16 to -0.12)
Andean Latin America 27.7 (20.2 to 37.7) 0 (0 to 0.1) 11.1 (-5.1 to 29.4) 1.41 (0.92 to 1.9) 2.8 (0.8 to 4.5) 0.005 (0.001 to 0.008) -56.5 (-76.4 to -29.5) -2.04 (-2.6 to -1.48) 49.7 (15.7 to 80.4) 0.1 (0 to 0.1) -55.4 (-74.6 to -30.1) -1.87 (-2.45 to -1.29)
Tropical Latin America 19237.2 (15573.6 to 23399) 7.5 (6 to 9.1) -37.1 (-42.2 to -31.9) -2.13 (-2.35 to -1.92) 1185.8 (1102.7 to 1269.7) 0.449 (0.417 to 0.481) -72.2 (-75.1 to -69) -5.23 (-5.67 to -4.78) 44412 (41533.2 to 47434.8) 16.8 (15.7 to 18) -70.8 (-73.8 to -67.6) -5.09 (-5.55 to -4.63)
Central Latin America 7975.7 (6594.5 to 9617.4) 3 (2.5 to 3.6) 12.7 (5.2 to 20.6) 0.16 (0.06 to 0.27) 478.4 (422 to 540.9) 0.184 (0.162 to 0.207) -16.8 (-29.1 to -4.4) -1.31 (-1.65 to -0.98) 17576.4 (15511.6 to 19757.7) 6.6 (5.8 to 7.4) -7.9 (-20.8 to 5.1) -0.9 (-1.2 to -0.6)
Southern Latin America 2105.5 (1704.6 to 2586.9) 2.7 (2.2 to 3.3) -63.9 (-67 to -59.8) -3.88 (-4.16 to -3.59) 175 (155.5 to 194.6) 0.206 (0.183 to 0.229) -83.5 (-86.1 to -80.4) -6.69 (-7.12 to -6.26) 5024.7 (4484.6 to 5557.2) 6.1 (5.5 to 6.8) -83.9 (-86.2 to -81) -6.72 (-7.14 to -6.3)
Caribbean 9445.3 (7741.6 to 11510.4) 18 (14.8 to 21.9) 291.8 (259.7 to 324.1) 5.65 (5.07 to 6.23) 998.2 (799.8 to 1207.9) 1.856 (1.483 to 2.256) 225 (144 to 312.1) 5.28 (4.69 to 5.87) 30772.6 (24177.5 to 37784.7) 57.8 (45.2 to 71.3) 200.1 (130.1 to 276.9) 4.9(4.35 to 5.46)
Central Europe 42372.2 (35271.7 to 50685.5) 25 (21.1 to 29.5) 60.4(47 to 75) 2.15 (1.95 to 2.34) 5346.3 (4287.7 to 6113.3) 2.668 (2.132 to 3.053) -6.6 (-22.2 to 9.3) 0.07 (-0.09 to 0.23) 149199 (119377.9 to 170872.8) 81.7 (65.1 to 93.8) 5.9 (-11.7 to 23.4) 0.46 (0.24 to 0.67)
Eastern Europe 173042.7 (142599.1 to 211308.7) 62.5 (51.9 to 75) 10.5 (3.3 to 17.8) 0.5 (0.22 to 0.79) 38834.7 (34484.1 to 42737) 13.079 (11.624 to 14.372) 40.9 (26.7 to 55.9) 0.65 (-0.9 to 2.22) 1426959.2 (1272059.1 to 1567982.1) 510.5 (456.7 to 560.3) 50.4 (34.6 to 67.7) 0.78 (-0.85 to 2.43)
Central Asia 5182 (4163.5 to 6386.5) 5.4 (4.4 to 6.6) 39 (28.5 to 48.8) 1.21 (1 to 1.42) 957.7 (788.7 to 1186.7) 1.032 (0.856 to 1.272) 33.9 (5.3 to 74.7) 1.19 (0.51 to 1.88) 35979.9 (29711.3 to 44305.1) 36.7 (30.4 to 45.2) 41.1 (11.8 to 81.7) 1.41 (0.74 to 2.09)
North Africa and Middle East 2524.4 (2072.5 to 3153.2) 0.4 (0.4 to 0.5) 5.5 (-1.2 to 13) 0.24 (0.14 to 0.34) 179.3 (51 to 350.6) 0.04 (0.012 to 0.078) -35.1 (-53.1 to -6.2) -1.42 (-1.51 to -1.33) 5724.4 (1684.9 to 10424) 1.1 (0.3 to 2) -36.5 (-53.4 to -11.6) -1.52 (-1.61 to -1.42)
South Asia 11199 (9043.9 to 13681.5) 0.7 (0.5 to 0.8) 4.2(-2.8 to 12.4) 0.22 (0.18 to 0.25) 1450.7 (268.9 to 3395) 0.094 (0.018 to 0.219) -15.8 (-45.9 to 23.7) -0.5 (-0.56 to -0.44) 47908 (9929.7 to 112144.6) 2.9 (0.6 to 6.7) -18.2 (-45.2 to 19.1) -0.62 (-0.66 to -0.58)
Southeast Asia 3219.2 (2644.3 to 3943) 0.4 (0.4 to 0.5) 22.9(15.3 to 30.8) 0.54 (0.46 to 0.62) 365.1 (67.2 to 605.5) 0.053 (0.01 to 0.085) -10.1 (-42.8 to 30.6) -0.6 (-0.74 to -0.47) 13674.5 (2550.3 to 21947.4) 1.8 (0.3 to 2.9) -6.7 (-40 to 32.6) -0.44 (-0.55 to -0.33)
East Asia 30311.5 (24088.8 to 37517.3) 1.6 (1.3 to 2) 158.1(133 to 183.6) 4.08 (3.68 to 4.48) 1999.6 (426.3 to 3149.7) 0.1 (0.022 to 0.156) 56.2(-45 to 181.5) 2.07 (1.79 to 2.35) 69749.7 (16481.7 to 109076.5) 3.6 (0.8 to 5.6) 71.5 (-33.5 to 206.2) 2.47 (2.18 to 2.76)
Oceania 21.1 (17 to 25.8) 0.2 (0.2 to 0.3) -12.9 (-19.7 to -6.4) -0.62 (-0.69 to -0.56) 5 (0.8 to 10.5) 0.054 (0.008 to 0.118) -28.5 (-55 to 14) -1.22 (-1.31 to -1.12) 206 (34.3 to 419.9) 1.9 (0.3 to 3.9) -26.8 (-56.7 to 18.5) -1.17 (-1.29 to -1.06)
Western Sub- Saharan Africa 9298 (6788.4 to 12252.1) 2.8 (2.1 to 3.6) 6.4 (1.8 to 11.3) 0.18 (0.05 to 0.31) 147.9 (22.5 to 382.2) 0.068 (0.012 to 0.169) -60.8 (-73.4 to -37.6) -3.64 (-3.93 to -3.35) 5983.8 (1532.2 to 14382.9) 2.3 (0.6 to 5.5) -57.6 (-72.1 to -29.1) -3.38 (-3.66 to -3.1)
Eastern Sub- Saharan Africa 8012.5 (5774.5 to 10964) 2.5 (1.9 to 3.4) -3.2(-8.1 to 2.8) -0.21 (-0.26 to -0.17) 2.9 (0.5 to 23.3) 0.001 (0 to 0.01) -28.2 (-61.9 to 3.8) -1.23 (-1.34 to -1.12) 860.7 (501.4 to 1620.2) 0.3 (0.2 to 0.6) -8.3 (-19.4 to 2.5) -0.41 (-0.45 to -0.36)
Central Sub- Saharan Africa 1484.7 (1092.9 to 2035) 1.6 (1.2 to 2.2) -12.8 (-20.7 to -4) -0.4 (-0.49 to -0.31) 2 (0.3 to 12) 0.003 (0.001 to 0.018) -25(-57.5 to 15.2) -0.99 (-1.03 to -0.95) 209.7 (115.2 to 595.2) 0.2 (0.1 to 0.7) -17.7 (-31.4 to 2.1) -0.63 (-0.69 to -0.57)
Southern Sub- Saharan Africa 451.5 (292.9 to 643.1) 0.6 (0.4 to 0.8) -23.3 (-28.1 to -17.8) -1.02 (-1.12 to -0.92) 3.4 (0.7 to 9.2) 0.009 (0.002 to 0.02) -27.2(-55.8 to 15.6) -0.72 (-1.2 to -0.25) 172.1 (72.5 to 468.6) 0.3 (0.1 to 0.6) -18.1 (-42.4 to 29) -0.65 (-0.95vto-0.34)

95%UI=95% uncertainty intervals.

1.2 Mortality.

China revealed a disproportionate burden: the global age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR) declined by 37.1% (0.74 per 100,000) from 1990 to 2021 (95% UIs: -42.9 to -31.7 and 0.65 to 0.80), whereas China’s ASMR spiked by 80.3% (0.096 per 100,000) (95% UIs: -43.2 to 261.7 and 0.017 to 0.152). Markedly divergent trajectories emerged: China’s sustained ASMR increase (EAPC = 2.67) sharply contrasted with the global decline (EAPC = -1.72), underscoring population-specific risk determinants (Table 1).

1.3 DALYs.

Amplified gender-regional disparities emerged: Global DALYs decreased by 29.3% (ASDR 25.3 per 100,000) (95% UIs: –35.3 to –23.7 and 22.4 to 27.5), whereas China experienced a 90.2% surge (0.78 per 100,000) (95% UIs: –34.4 to 274.9 and 0.15 to 1.24). Temporally, China’s sustained ASDR increase (EAPC = 2.91, 95% UI: 2.59 to 3.22) demonstrated fundamental departure from the global decline (EAPC = –1.44, 95% UI: –2.61 to –0.27), signaling emergent public health challenges across regions (Table 1).

2. Age-specific burden of ACM: China vs Global population (2021)

Fig 2 and S2 Table reveal distinct epidemiological patterns: Globally, ACM predominantly affected individuals 15years, with male prevalence peaking at 70–74 years (peak case count at 65–69 years) and female rates at 65–69 years. Prevalence rose in 15–74 and 80–94-year-olds but declined among 75–84-year-olds and those 95 years.China manifested divergent patterns characterized by:(1) Persistent male dominance across all ages (male-to-female ratio: 7.8:1 through age 94);(2) Bimodal prevalence distribution in males (peaks at 15–49 and 60–69 years, with intervening decline at 50–64 years);(3) Steady female prevalence increase across all age groups. Critically, both case numbers and prevalence rates peaked earlier in China (45–49 years) than globally, implying accelerated disease onset potentially associated with: Occupational drinking cultures among prime working-age males Earlier initiation of alcohol exposure Sex-differential biological susceptibility (discussed in Sect 3) Mortality and DALY distributions appear in S1 Fig-S2 Fig and S2 Table, collectively supporting these sex-specific patterns.

Fig 2. Age-stratified case counts and crude prevalence rates of ACM by geographic scope: Global vs. China, 2021.

Fig 2

A Age-specific prevalence numbers for the global population; B Age-specific prevalence numbers for China; C Crude prevalence rate for the Global population; D Crude prevalence rate for China.

3. Temporal evolution of gender disparities (1990–2021)

The global gender gap peaked in 2006 (male ASPRs exceeded female by 186%) before narrowing (Fig 3A, S3 Table and S4 Table). China exhibited a divergent trajectory: male ASPRs accelerated post-2002, with absolute disparities persistently expanding despite slowed growth after 2015, reflecting intervention deficiencies targeting high-risk males (Fig 3B). Mortality disparities peaked in the middle-aged cohort (50–64 years), where Chinese male ASMRs reached 12.7-fold higher than females—significantly surpassing global patterns (Fig 3C, 3D). Close concordance between ASDR and mortality rates confirmed male-dominated burden as the primary prevention target (Fig 3E3F).

Fig 3. Temporal trends in ACM burden (1990–2021): All-age case counts and age-standardized rates (prevalence/ASPRs, mortality/ASMRs, disability/ASDRs) stratified by sex.

Fig 3

A Global prevalence; B China prevalences; C Global mortality; D China mortality; E Global DALYs; F China DALYs.

4. Joinpoint regression analysis of the burden of ACM in China and the global population

Epidemiological Transition Distinct epidemic phases were identified ((Table 2); Figs 45 and S2 Fig): China exhibited two phases—ultrarapid expansion before 2004 (APC = 13.74, 95% UI: 12.94–14.55) followed by moderated but sustained growth post-2010 (APC = 4.15, 95% UI: 4.01 to 4.30). Globally, after a brief 1995–2004 ascent (APC = 0.85, 95% UI: 0.77 to 0.93), progressive decline prevailed, reflecting profound socio-demographic restructuring of disease burden.

Table 2. Joinpoint regression analysis of temporal trends in age-standardized prevalence, mortality, and DALY rates (per 100,000 population) stratified by sex (both, male, female) and region (global vs. China), 1990–2021.

Gender China_ASPR China_ASDR China_ASMR
Period APC(95%UI) AAPC(95%UI) Period APC(95%UI) AAPC(95%UI) Period APC(95%UI) AAPC(95%UI)
Both 1990-1995 0.74 (0.41 - 1.08) 3.68 (3.54 - 3.82) 1990-1992 -1.43 (-3.24 - 0.42) 2.11 (1.84 - 2.39) 1990-1992 -1.73 (-3.67 - 0.25) 1.93 (1.71 - 2.15)
1995-2000 3.58 (3.11 - 4.04) 1992-1998 3.07 (2.64 - 3.51) 1992-1996 3.72 (2.73 - 4.72)
2000-2004 13.74 (12.94 - 14.55) 1998-2001 1.00 (-1.05 - 3.09) 1996-2005 2.77 (2.54 - 3.01)
2004-2014 4.15 (4.01 - 4.30) 2001-2005 3.35 (2.32 - 4.39) 2005-2010 6.50 (5.91 - 7.10)
2014-2021 -0.21 (-0.44 - 0.01) 2005-2010 7.37 (6.84 - 7.91) 2010-2014 0.49 (-0.26 - 1.24)
2010-2015 1.02 (0.62 - 1.43) 2014-2021 -1.42 (-1.61 - -1.24)
2015-2021 -1.21 (-1.42 - -1.00)
Male 1990-1996 0.74 (0.46 - 1.02) 3.71 (3.55 - 3.87) 1990-1992 -1.51 (-3.31 - 0.32) 2.53 (2.26 - 2.80) 1990-1992 -1.34 (-3.15 - 0.50) 2.44 (2.17 - 2.72)
1996-2000 3.43 (2.61 - 4.26) 1992-1996 3.73 (2.79 - 4.68) 1992-1997 3.80 (3.18 - 4.42)
2000-2005 12.07 (11.50 - 12.65) 1996-2002 1.40 (0.94 - 1.85) 1997-2002 1.62 (0.96 - 2.28)
2005-2015 4.32 (4.16 - 4.49) 2002-2005 4.03 (1.96 - 6.15) 2002-2005 3.91 (1.79 - 6.08)
2015-2021 -0.74 (-1.06 - -0.41) 2005-2010 9.04 (8.50 - 9.59) 2005-2010 8.43 (7.88 - 8.99)
2010-2015 1.83 (1.45 - 2.21) 2010-2014 1.71 (1.06 - 2.36)
2015-2021 -1.10 (-1.30 - -0.91) 2014-2021 -1.12 (-1.27 - -0.96)
Female 1990-1995 2.04 (1.50 - 2.59) 3.24 (3.03 - 3.46) 1990-1993 -1.63 (-3.15 - -0.09) -0.63 (-0.87 - -0.40) 1990-1993 -1.20 (-2.83 - 0.46) -0.39 (-0.64 - -0.13)
1995-2000 8.20 (7.43 - 8.98) 1993-2004 3.99 (3.76 - 4.23) 1993-2004 4.68 (4.42 - 4.93)
2000-2004 15.42 (14.12 - 16.73) 2004-2010 -1.51 (-2.08 - -0.94) 2004-2010 -1.40 (-2.04 - -0.76)
2004-2013 -0.07 (-0.31 - 0.18) 2010-2017 -5.55 (-5.95 - -5.16) 2010-2017 -5.74 (-6.18 - -5.30)
2013-2021 -0.91 (-1.17 - -0.66) 2017-2021 -2.15 (-3.01 - -1.28) 2017-2021 -2.18 (-3.12 - -1.23)

AAPC: average annual percent change presented for full period; APC: annual percent change; CI: confidence interval.

Fig 4. Joinpoint regression analysis of sex-stratified ASPRs for ACM: Global vs. China, 1990–2021.

Fig 4

A Global; B China.

Fig 5. Joinpoint regression analysis of sex-stratified ASMRs for ACM: Global vs. China, 1990–2021.

Fig 5

A Global; B China.

5. Burden of ACM across SDI quintiles in China and globally, 1990–2021

The burden of ACM, encompassing case numbers, mortality counts, ASPRs, and ASMRs, which exhibited marked regional disparities across SDI quintiles over the 1990-2021 observation period (Fig 6). High and high-middle SDI quintiles consistently demonstrated elevated case numbers and ASPRs compared to lower SDI groups throughout the study timeframe. While these metrics showed modest declines in recent decades, they remained substantially higher than baseline levels. Notably, China (categorized within the middle-high SDI group) achieved significantly greater ASPR reductions relative to both global averages and its SDI-matched counterparts, though minor resurgences emerged post-2010. Mortality patterns revealed distinct trajectories: high-middle SDI quintile exceeded high SDI areas in absolute mortality counts and ASMRs until plateauing at 2005 peaks. China’s ASMR maintained stable low levels comparable to low, low-middle, and middle SDI strata throughout the study period.

Fig 6. Joinpoint Temporal trends in ACM burden (1990–2021): prevalence/death counts and ASRs of prevalence and mortality stratified by SDI quintiles.

Fig 6

A Prevalence numbers; B Mortality numbers; C ASPRs; D ASMRs.

6. Age-period-cohort patterns

Fig 7A and 7E depict the evolution of age-specific ACM prevalence globally and in China across seven survey cycles (1992, 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016, 2021). Globally, prevalence surged rapidly in the 0–50 age stratum, exhibiting a characteristic triple-peak distribution at ages 70 and 90, with overall progressive aging shift (peak: 70→90 years). In stark contrast, China demonstrated unique early-onset epidemics concentrated at ages 45–49. Age-stratified prevalence dynamics are further delineated in Fig 7B and 7F. Longitudinal analysis (1990–2021) revealed divergent trajectories: gradual reductions across all age groups globally versus sustained increases in China, particularly pronounced among middle-aged (40–64 years) and elderly populations (65 years) (Fig 7C, 7G). Birth cohort patterns (Fig 7D, 7H) indicated steady global prevalence escalation peaking at 65–70 years, contrasted by China’s earlier apex (45–50 years) followed by decline.

Fig 7. Global and China’s prevalence rates of ACM.

Fig 7

Global A and China’s E age-specific prevalence rates of ACM according to time periods;Global B and China’s F age-specific prevalence rates of ACM according to birth cohort; each line connects the age-specific prevalence for a 5-year cohort.Global C and China’s G period-specific prevalence rates of ACM according to age groups; Global D and China’s H The birth cohort-specific prevalence rates of ACM according to age groups; each line connects the birth cohort-specific incidence for a 5-year age group.

7. Decomposition analysis of ACM disease burden: Comparative insights from China, worldwide, and SDI quintiles trends

We conducted a decomposition analysis on the DALYs data to assess the impacts of demographic aging, population increase, and epidemiological shifts on the burden of ACM between 1990 and 2021. Global DALYs increased significantly across all SDI quintiles except high SDI region, with parallel growth observed in China (Fig 8, S5 Table). Population expansion and aging accounted for 149.63% and 55.71% of global DALY increases respectively, whereas in China their contributions were more balanced (25.21% and 23.1%). Epidemiological changes exerted opposing effects: globally reducing DALY growth by 105.35% through risk factor mitigation, while amplifying China’s burden by 51.64% due to residual disease susceptibility.The contributions of demographic and epidemiological drivers to DALYs exhibited marked quantitative disparities between China and global SDI strata, with population growth dominating globally versus balanced drivers in China (S5 Table).

Fig 8. Decomposition analysis of ACM DALYs changes (1990–2021) quantifies the contributions of population growth, aging, and epidemiological transition across geographic (global vs. China) and developmental strata.

Fig 8

The aggregate effect (black circular marker) reflects combined impacts of all three components, with positive values indicating drivers of DALYs increase and negative values representing reduction factors.

8. Health inequity transition

The standardized inequality index (SII) for ASDR per 100,000 individuals shifted from 22.05 (95% uncertainty interval: 17.18 to 26.91) in 1990 to - 3.97 (95% uncertainty interval: - 11.92 to 3.97) in 2021, reflecting a fundamental reversal in the association between DALY rates and SDI from positive to negative correlation (Fig 9A). This period witnessed a socioeconomic reversal of ACM burden inequity, with ASDRs becoming disproportionately concentrated in lower-SDI nations. The Concentration Index (CI) of global DALYs approached equity neutrality (CI 1990 = - 0.59 vs CI 2021 = - 0.04, Fig 9B), demonstrating reduced cross-national health inequities in ACM burden. Temporal analysis revealed progressive SII convergence (Fig 9C): although regional-level disparities between low- and high-income countries diminished, persistent global inequities remained evident.

Fig 9. Income-related health inequality in ACM Burden: Comparative analysis using Slope Index of Inequality (SII) and Concentration Index (1990 vs. 2021).

Fig 9

A Absolute income-related healthy inequality in ACM burden, presented using regression lines, 1990 vs. 2021. B Relative income-related healthy inequality in ACM burden, presented using concentration curves, 1990 vs. 2021. C Trendline demonstrates the trend in SII from 1990 to 2021.

9. Association between ASPRs and social development

Index across 21 distinct regions and 204 countries The association between SDI and ASPRs demonstrates a nonlinear asymmetric inverse-V pattern globally and across 21 regions (Fig 10A). High-middle and high SDI quintiles exhibited elevated ASPRs, Eastern Europe, categorized within the high SDI quintile, exhibited peak prevalence rates, while Andean Latin America (middle SDI quintile, SDI=0.652) demonstrated the lowest ASPRs. Cross-national analysis of 204 countries revealed high ASPRs concentration in high-middle and high SDI regions, with limited differentiation across lower SDI quintiles. Russia demonstrated the highest ASPRs, exceeding expected levels significantly alongside Latvia and Ukraine. Conversely, China’s ASPR (high-middle SDI=0.72) remained substantially below projected values despite comparable SDI rankings (Fig 10B).

Fig 10. The association between ASPR and SDI at the regions (A) and nations (B) level.

Fig 10

10. Frontier analysis of 204 nations

High-income nations underutilized healthcare advantages: Fig 11A demonstrates significant untapped health potential (avoidable DALY losses) during 1990–2021, while Fig 11B quantifies a 34% theory-reality gap in 2021 health attainment versus actual burden (S6 Table). Crucially, the gap widened disproportionately with national affluence, indicating suboptimal conversion of medical resources into burden reduction.

Fig 11. Frontier analysis of ACM ASDRs by SDI in 2021.

Fig 11

A The frontier is shown in solid black, while countries and regions are represented by dots. B The top 15 countries with the largest effective difference (largest ACM DALYs gap from the frontier) are labeled in purple; examples of frontier countries with low SDI (< 0.5) and low effective difference are labeled in green (e.g., Somalia, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Malawi, Eritrea), and examples of countries and territories with high SDI (> 0.85) and relatively high effective difference for their level of development are labeled in blue (e.g., the United States, Lithuania, Monaco, Finland, Germany).Blue dots indicate an increase in age-standardized ACM DALYs rate from 1990 to 2021; Red dots indicate a decrease in age-standardized ACM DALYs rate between 1990 and 2021.

11. Projecting global and Chinese ACM burden (2022–2036): BAPC analysis.

Using GBD 1990–2021 data, we implemented the Bayesian APC-INLA model to project ASRs of ACM globally and in China. Results indicate consistent annual ASPR declines worldwide: males decreasing from 11 to 7 per 100,000 and females from 3 to 2 per 100,000 (Fig 12). In China, male ASPRs are projected to decline modestly (3→2 per 100,000), while female rates remain stable (0.383–0.398 per 100,000) (S7 Table). Parallel gradual reductions in ASDRs and ASMRs are anticipated globally and nationally during the projection period (Fig 12, S7 Table). Collectively, these forecasts suggest sustained 15-year declines in ASDRs (–0.9% annually), ASMRs (–1.2%), and mortality rates (–1.4%), though male disease burden persists substantially higher than females.

Fig 12. Projection of ACM burden in China and global populations (2022-2036):

Fig 12

Sex-specific Bayesian Age-Period-Cohort (BAPC) modeling analysis (A); Global Females (B); China males (C); China Females (D). Trends of ASDR from 1990 to 2036 in Global males (E); Global Females (F); China males (G)/China Females (H). Trends of ASMR from 1990 to 2036 in Global males (I); Global Females (J); China males (K); China Females (L).

Discussion

ACM represents a preventable form of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy whose epidemiological burden serves as a sentinel indicator of the complex interactions among cultural drinking norms, alcohol consumption behaviors, genetic predispositions, and public health governance. This study leveraged the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 dataset to systematically evaluate the trajectories of ACM-associated prevalence, mortality, and DALYs in China and globally during 1990–2021.

Data analysis revealed declining standardized rates (ASPR/ASMR/ASDR) alongside expanding absolute case counts globally, a paradoxical phenomenon primarily attributable to two concurrent drivers: (1) 32-year sustained public health efforts encompassing population education, health promotion, alcohol control, early diagnosis, and cardiac rehabilitation; (2) demographic aging and structural shifts—despite aggregate global improvement, significant inter-country disparities persist. SDI quintile analysis demonstrated marked geographical heterogeneity: upper-middle SDI regions exhibited substantially escalating absolute disease burden with parallel ASDR/ASMR increases, a pattern potentially presaging future burden trajectories in adjacent middle SDI regions, while middle/lower-middle/low SDI regions maintained relative stability. Classified as upper-middle SDI [13], China manifested counterintuitively robust upward trends: all 1990–2021 EAPCs registered high positive values (ASPR EAPC=4.79). Despite sustained lower ASPR/ASMR levels versus global and same-SDI-quintile peers with recent mild increases—indicating SDI is not the primary ACM burden determinant [14]—this derives from a tetrad of synergistic mechanisms: consumption transition (127% per capita alcohol increase 2000–2020) [15]; high-ethanol spirits dominance (>40% ethanol beverages linked to 53% cases) [16]; rural healthcare deficits (4.2% rehabilitation coverage); and genetic susceptibility (30.2% ALDH2*2 mutation frequency in males) [17,18]. Country-specific burden analysis identified Eastern Europe as the most prominent among 21 global hotspots [19], with Ukraine/Latvia demonstrating the heaviest alcohol-attributable mortality burdens strongly correlated with the world’s highest per capita consumption (Latvia >14L annually) [20]. Predominant spirits consumption coupled with prevalent heavy episodic drinking [21,22] established pronounced male dose-response relationships [23]. Although multiple Eastern European nations (e.g., Czech Republic/Estonia) implemented interventions like tax escalations, enforcement inconsistencies compromised efficacy [24].

Gender analysis indicates that the burden is significantly higher in males compared to females, likely stemming from differences in drinking patterns (occupational exposure/reinforcement of cultural norms) [25] and biological risks (metabolic pathways/genetic susceptibility) [26,27]. Cohort studies confirm that males have a markedly elevated risk of cardiac dysfunction (HR=1.75, 95% CI 1.60–1.92) [28] and fatal arrhythmias (HR=1.89, 95% CI 1.65–2.16) [29]. Meanwhile, age-related data reveal that China exhibits a distinct age stratification with a bimodal distribution, characterized by an initial peak at 45–50 years and a primary peak at 65–69 years. Based on the above analysis, policy development should prioritize a dual-track strategy: implementing immediate rigorous controls in middle-high SDI regions experiencing sharp burden surges, while proactively deploying targeted prevention strategies in middle SDI regions to curb potential burden escalation; concurrently, prevention and treatment frameworks must integrate gender and age stratification as core priorities, reinforcing two intervention windows: strengthening WHO alcohol control measures for <25 years (requiring blocking the 37% rise in youth digital marketing exposure) and optimizing screening for >45 years (addressing rural screening coverage gaps below 18%) [30]. Regarding fiscal and publicity dimensions: implement WHO progressive alcohol taxation (20–50% tax rates potentially reducing consumption by 16–28%) [16] while enhancing advertising regulations: restricting youth digital marketing aligned with the FCTC Convention and delivering precision education through gender/age-stratified interventions, enforcing restrictions benchmarked against the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control [31]; additionally, for countries with significant regional disease burden disparities, incorporate genetic susceptibility screening into routine practice. However, this study has methodological limitations: 1. Death misclassification risk: clinical diagnostic overlap between ACM and other cardiomyopathies (e.g., dilated cardiomyopathy), particularly in primary care with high misdiagnosis rates, potentially underestimating burden; 2. Alcohol exposure measurement bias: alcohol consumption estimates reliant on household surveys and tax data without correction for unrecorded consumption (e.g., homemade spirits); 3. Inadequate comorbidity control: the GBD model incompletely integrates synergistic effects of conditions like depression and liver disease, potentially distorting attribution analysis; 4. Missing policy variables: failure to quantify provincial/national alcohol policy strength (e.g., tax enforcement, advertising ban scope), constraining policy-burden association analysis; 5. Alcohol-type data fragmentation: no differentiation between spirits, imported liquors, beer etc. Future efforts should enhance model validity through deep learning of electronic medical records to correct misdiagnoses, integrate alcohol biomarker monitoring, and develop policy strength indices.

Conclusion

ACM, a preventable condition through lifestyle modifications, demonstrates the critical importance of early clinical intervention for significantly improving patient prognosis. Global epidemiological data from 1990 to 2021 indicate relative progress in mitigating ACM burden across most regions. However, China’s epidemiological trajectory presents a striking contrast, exhibiting a persistent upward trend during this period. Our analysis reveals pronounced disparities in ACM burden distribution across three key demographic dimensions: (1) absolute male predominance (male-to-female prevalence ratio of 3:1); (2) disproportionate concentration of disease burden among middle-aged (45-49 years) and elderly (65+ years) populations; and (3) geographic clustering predominantly in middle-high sociodemographic index (SDI) regions, with Eastern European countries demonstrating the highest standardized prevalence rates. This epidemiological divergence underscores the urgent need to address China’s accelerating ACM burden, mandating policymakers to immediately implement three-tiered actions: First, enforce progressive spirits taxation (rates 30%) and comprehensively block youth digital marketing channels (curbing the current 37% surge in exposure rates); second, elevate rural echocardiography screening coverage to 50% by 2025 (current coverage gap <18%) while implementing compulsory occupational alcohol restrictions in high-exposure occupations such as manufacturing and transportation; third, incorporate an annual ACM mortality reduction rate 5% into local performance assessment systems, establishing real-time monitoring of tax evasion rates. Researchers must prioritize four critical domains: establishing clinical diagnostic thresholds for ACM-predisposing genetic variants (e.g., PNPLA3/HSD17B13 loci), developing rapid biomarker detection kits, completing multicenter RCTs on digital alcohol cessation therapies, and constructing agent-based modeling (ABM) simulations for alcohol taxation policies—ultimately forging an epidemiologically-tailored prevention-control framework to accelerate achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 3.4 targets.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Global and China age-specific numbers and crude morality rates or of ACM in 2021.

A Global age-specific morality numbers. B China age-specific deaths numbers C Global crude morality rates. D China crude morality rates; Global and China age-specific numbers and crude DALY rates of ACM in 2021. E Global age-specific DALYs numbers. F China age-specific DALYs numbers . G Global crude DALY rates. H China crude DALY rates.

(PNG)

pone.0336033.s001.png (812KB, png)
S2 Fig. Joinpoint regression analysis of the sex-specific ASDRs for ACM in China and worldwide from 1990 to 2021. A.

Global analysis; B China’s analysis.

(PNG)

pone.0336033.s002.png (623.6KB, png)
S1 Table. The Burden of Alcoholic Cardiomyopathy (ACM) in 2021: Age-Standardized Rates (ASPR) and Estimated Annual Percentage Changes (EAPC) in China and Globally.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s003.xlsx (25.2KB, xlsx)
S2 Table. Global and China age-specific numbers and crude rates of prevalence,morality and DALY for ACM in 2021.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s004.xlsx (20.2KB, xlsx)
S3 Table. Global all-age cases and ASPRs, ASMRs and ASDRs of ACM by sex from 1990 to 2021.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s005.xlsx (21.3KB, xlsx)
S4 Table. All-age cases and ASPRs, ASMRs and ASDRs of ACM in China by sex from 1990 to 2021.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s006.xlsx (19.2KB, xlsx)
S5 Table. Changes in ACM DALYs according to population-level determinants of population, aging, and epidemiological change from 1990 to 2021 at the global , China and by SDI quintiles.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s007.xlsx (10.5KB, xlsx)
S6 Table. The frontier analysis of ACM ASDRs by SDI in 2021.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s008.xlsx (26.5KB, xlsx)
S7 Table. The frontier analysis of ACM ASDRs by SDI in 2021.

Global and China Predicted ASPRs,ASDRs and ASMRs by EAPC models.

(XLSX)

pone.0336033.s009.xlsx (17KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

This study exclusively utilized de-identified aggregate data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (GBD 2021), which is permanently hosted and publicly accessible at zero cost through the IHME data portal: https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool. No original datasets were generated in this work, as all analyzed data are openly available at the above link per IHME’s data access policy.

Funding Statement

ZChen No. 81960085 The National Natural Science Foundation of China gyfybsky-2022-44 Guizhou Medical University Doctoral Research Initiation Fund No. qiankehejichu-ZK[2023]yiban372 The Science and Technology Fund of Guizhou Provincial.

References

  • 1.Figueredo VM, Patel A. Detrimental effects of alcohol on the heart: hypertension and cardiomyopathy. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023;24(10):292. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2410292 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Roerecke M. Alcohol’s impact on the cardiovascular system. Nutrients. 2021;13(10):3419. doi: 10.3390/nu13103419 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ramandi A, Diehl A-M, Sanyal AJ, de Jong YP. Experimental models to investigate PNPLA3 in liver steatosis. Liver Int. 2025;45(5):e70091. doi: 10.1111/liv.70091 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Cheng S, Han Y, Jiang L, Lan Z, Guo J. National, regional and global cardiomyopathy burden from 1990 to 2019. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:1042448. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1042448 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Zou C, Zou H, Jiang Y, Lai S, Liu J. Association between cardiovascular risk factors and dilated and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Mendelian randomization analysis. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2025;35(1):103752. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2024.09.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Patel A, Figueredo VM. Alcohol and cardiovascular disease: helpful or hurtful. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023;24(4):121. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2404121 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wang C, Li S, Liu Q, Qian Q, Fu A, Chen L, et al. Ectopic accumulation of ceramide in cardiomyocytes modulates alcoholic cardiomyopathy via the TLR4-dependent pathway. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2022;46(6):1011–22. doi: 10.1111/acer.14822 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Zhang Y, Zhang R, Lu L, Zhou N, Lv X, Wang X, et al. Knockdown of lectin-like oxidized low-density lipoprotein-1 ameliorates alcoholic cardiomyopathy via inactivating the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. Bioengineered. 2022;13(4):8926–36. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2022.2056814 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rasoul D, Ajay A, Abdullah A, Mathew J, Lee Wei En B, Mashida K, et al. Alcohol and heart failure. Eur Cardiol. 2023;18:e65. doi: 10.15420/ecr.2023.12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Pinto YM, Elliott PM, Arbustini E, Adler Y, Anastasakis A, Böhm M, et al. Proposal for a revised definition of dilated cardiomyopathy, hypokinetic non-dilated cardiomyopathy, and its implications for clinical practice: a position statement of the ESC working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(23):1850–8. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv727 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.GBD 2017 Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex-specific mortality for 282 causes of death in 195 countries and territories, 1980-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1736–88. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32203-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Liu Z, Jiang Y, Yuan H, Fang Q, Cai N, Suo C, et al. The trends in incidence of primary liver cancer caused by specific etiologies: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016 and implications for liver cancer prevention. J Hepatol. 2019;70(4):674–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.12.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Cochrane J, Chen H, Conigrave KM, Hao W. Alcohol use in China. Alcohol Alcohol. 2003;38(6):537–42. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agg111 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Nemtsov AV. Alcohol-related human losses in Russia in the 1980 s and 1990s. Addiction. 2002;97(11):1413–25. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00262.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204–22. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Organization WH. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. World Health Organization; 2003.
  • 17.Chen X, Gui S, Wei D, Deng D, Tang Y, Lv J, et al. Aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 gene mutation may reduce the risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysm in Chinese Han population. J Stroke. 2025;27(2):237–49. doi: 10.5853/jos.2024.04098 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.He Q, Pan J, Wang L, Fang Y, Hu R. Prospective study: Aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 gene is associated with cardio-cerebrovascular complications in type 2 diabetes patients. Journal of Diabetes Investigation. 2021;12(10):1845–54. doi: 10.1111/jdi.13538 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Park SH, Kim DJ. Global and regional impacts of alcohol use on public health: Emphasis on alcohol policies. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2020;26(4):652–61. doi: 10.3350/cmh.2020.0160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Rehm J, Štelem ėkas M, Kim KV, Zafar A, Lange S. Alcohol and health in Central and Eastern European Union countries - status quo and alcohol policy options. J Health Inequal. 2021;7(2):91–5. doi: 10.5114/jhi.2021.113167 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Correia D, Manthey J, Neufeld M, Ferreira-Borges C, Olsen A, Shield K, et al. Classifying national drinking patterns in Europe between 2000 and 2019: a clustering approach using comparable exposure data. Addiction. 2024;119(9):1543–53. doi: 10.1111/add.16567 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Füssenich K, Nusselder WJ, Lhachimi SK, Boshuizen HC, Feenstra TF. Potential gains in health expectancy by improving lifestyle: an application for European regions. Popul Health Metr. 2019;17(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12963-018-0181-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Janssen F, El Gewily S, Bardoutsos A, Trias-Llimós S. Past and future alcohol-attributable mortality in Europe. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(23):9024. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17239024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Parker R, Arab JP, Lazarus JV, Bataller R, Singal AK. Public health policies to prevent alcohol-related liver disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025;22(8):587–94. doi: 10.1038/s41575-025-01084-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Regitz-Zagrosek V. Sex and gender differences in heart failure. Int J Heart Fail. 2020;2(3):157–81. doi: 10.36628/ijhf.2020.0004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.López-Palop R, Carrillo P, Lozano Í. Impact of sex in the incidence of heart failure in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Curr Heart Fail Rep. 2024;21(4):354–66. doi: 10.1007/s11897-024-00663-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Madundo K, Hudda A, Seekles ML, Mmbaga B, Obasi A. The landscape and level of alcohol policy enforcement in Tanzania. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024;4(12):e0003203. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003203 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chugh SS, Reinier K, Teodorescu C, Evanado A, Kehr E, Al Samara M, et al. Epidemiology of sudden cardiac death: clinical and research implications. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2008;51(3):213–28. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2008.06.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Ho KK, Pinsky JL, Kannel WB, Levy D. The epidemiology of heart failure: the Framingham Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4 Suppl A):6A-13A. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90455-a [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Wilsnack RW, Vogeltanz ND, Wilsnack SC, Harris TR, Ahlström S, Bondy S, et al. Gender differences in alcohol consumption and adverse drinking consequences: cross-cultural patterns. Addiction. 2000;95(2):251–65. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2000.95225112.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204–22. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Amir Hossein Behnoush

25 Jun 2025

PONE-D-25-11641Epidemiological trends in alcoholic cardiomyopathy burden: A 32-year global and Chinese analysis (1990–2021) with projections to 2036PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Chen,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 09 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Amir Hossein Behnoush

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please note that PLOS ONE has specific guidelines on code sharing for submissions in which author-generated code underpins the findings in the manuscript. In these cases, we expect all author-generated code to be made available without restrictions upon publication of the work. Please review our guidelines at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-code and ensure that your code is shared in a way that follows best practice and facilitates reproducibility and reuse.

3.  Please update your submission to use the PLOS LaTeX template. The template and more information on our requirements for LaTeX submissions can be found at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/latex.

4. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

“ZChen

No.81960085

The National Natural Science Foundation of China

gyfybsky-2022-44

Guizhou Medical University Doctoral Research Initiation Fund

No.qiankehejichu-ZK[2023]yiban372

The Science and Technology Fund of Guizhou Provincial”

Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed.

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. Please provide a complete Data Availability Statement in the submission form, ensuring you include all necessary access information or a reason for why you are unable to make your data freely accessible. If your research concerns only data provided within your submission, please write "All data are in the manuscript and/or supporting information files" as your Data Availability Statement.

6. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

7. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).%20Please%20be%20aware%20that%20this%20license%20allows%20unrestricted%20use%20and%20distribution,%20even%20commercially,%20by%20third%20parties.%20Please%20reply%20and%20provide%20explicit%20written%20permission%20to%20publish%20XXX%20under%20a%20CC%20BY%20license%20and%20complete%20the%20attached%20form.”%0b%0bPlease%20upload%20the%20completed%20Content%20Permission%20Form%20or%20other%20proof%20of%20granted%20permissions%20as%20an%20%22Other%22%20file%20with%20your%20submission.%0b%0bIn%20the%20figure%20caption%20of%20the%20copyrighted%20figure,%20please%20include%20the%20following%20text:%20“Reprinted%20from%20%5bref%5d%20under%20a%20CC%20BY%20license,%20with%20permission%20from%20%5bname%20of%20publisher%5d,%20original%20copyright%20%5boriginal%20copyright%20year%5d.”%0b%0bb.%20If%20you%20are%20unable%20to%20obtain%20permission%20from%20the%20original%20copyright%20holder%20to%20publish%20these%20figures%20under%20the%20CC%20BY%204.0%20license%20or%20if%20the%20copyright%20holder’s%20requirements%20are%20incompatible%20with%20the%20CC%20BY%204.0%20license,%20please%20either%20i)%20remove%20the%20figure%20or%20ii)%20supply%20a%20replacement%20figure%20that%20complies%20with%20the%20CC%20BY%204.0%20license.%20Please%20check%20copyright%20information%20on%20all%20replacement%20figures%20and%20update%20the%20figure%20caption%20with%20source%20information.%20If%20applicable,%20please%20specify%20in%20the%20figure%20caption%20text%20when%20a%20figure%20is%20similar%20but%20not%20identical%20to%20the%20original%20image%20and%20is%20therefore%20for%20illustrative%20purposes%20only.%0bThe%20following%20resources%20for%20replacing%20copyrighted%20map%20figures%20may%20be%20helpful:%0b%0bUSGS%20National%20Map%20Viewer%20(public%20domain):%20http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/%0bThe%20Gateway%20to%20Astronaut%20Photography%20of%20Earth%20(public%20domain):%20http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/%0bMaps%20at%20the%20CIA%20(public%20domain):%20https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html%20and%20https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html%0bNASA%20Earth%20Observatory%20(public%20domain):%20http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/%0bLandsat:%20http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/%0bUSGS%20EROS%20(Earth%20Resources%20Observatory%20and%20Science%20(EROS)%20Center)%20(public%20domain):%20http://eros.usgs.gov/# Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/ " xlink:type="simple">We note that Figure 2 in your submission contain map/satellite images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 2 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Abstract

• The background lacks a strong rationale for why ACM is a critical issue, beyond general disease burden. Clarify why ACM is a growing concern.

• The results section could be more concise—it currently repeats statistics instead of synthesizing the main findings. Summarise key findings concisely.

• The conclusion should explicitly state future research directions—such as potential interventions for ACM burden reduction. Explicitly mention the knowledge gap and future research.

Introduction

• The research gap and justification for a scoping review are unclear. Clearly define the research gap.

• Lacks a clear hypothesis or research question. Explicitly state research questions.

• Overuse of technical jargon—simplify complex epidemiological terms for broader accessibility. Reduce jargon and introduce technical terms only when necessary.

Methods

• Lacks details on data validation and bias mitigation strategies. Specify validation steps for GBD 2021 data.

• The BAPC model parameters should be better explained—readers may not be familiar with integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA). Simplify Bayesian modelling explanation.

• Needs clarity on ethical considerations for secondary data usage. Clarify ethical considerations for using publicly available datasets.

Results

• Some sections are overly statistical—less emphasis on numerical data, and more focus on interpretation and synthesis. Synthesize key results instead of listing excessive statistics.

• The gender-based analysis could be more detailed—why are males disproportionately affected? Expand on gender disparities.

• Needs a stronger narrative flow between different sections (e.g., prevalence → mortality → DALYs). Improve flow between sections.

5. Discussion

• Lacks in-depth discussion of causal mechanisms behind observed trends. Expand on why ACM is increasing in China.

• The role of healthcare infrastructure and policy interventions in disease burden reduction is underexplored. Discuss healthcare access and intervention disparities.

• The limitations section is missing—important for academic rigor. Add a Limitations Section.

6. Conclusion

• Needs a stronger call to action for policymakers and researchers. Explicitly state implications for policymakers.

• Future research recommendations should be more specific. Clearly outline research priorities.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript provides a data-rich but analytically shallow review of ACM epidemiology. Its primary weaknesses lie in overcomplex language and poor methodological transparency. Substantial revisions are required to sharpen focus, reduce redundancy, and critically interpret findings.

Please use full name for DALY the first time you use it in manuscript, regardless of your mentioning within the abstract. Please include the limitations facing reliance on GBD data, underreporting in low-SDI countries, modeling assumptions. Many citations are from general cardiovascular or alcohol epidemiology studies, not from ACM-specific or recent high-impact sources.

Introduction: Please include the importance of genetic factors in alcoholic myopathy. While traditionally it was thought that alcohol-related disorders such as AFLD are only diet-related, it has now been comprehensively shown that several prevalent variation of several genes such as PNPLA3 and HSD17B13 are highly correlated with metabolic disorders and cardiovascular problems. Most importantly, PNPLA3 gene is a very important gene since it has a prevalence of ~30% worldwide, which is close to the prevalence of diabetes, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular events associated to the named diseases. I highly recommend the authors to integrate genetic part of this disorder by including recent publishings such as PMID: 40231787, so that the revised manuscript would have a more comprehensive view toward the disease.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Faizul Akmal Abdul Rahim

Reviewer #2: Yes: Alireza Ramandi

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Nov 18;20(11):e0336033. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0336033.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


30 Jul 2025

Reviewer #1: Abstract

•The background lacks a strong rationale for why ACM is a critical issue, beyond general disease burden. Clarify why ACM is a growing concern.

�Added critical epidemiological paradox: “Despite global cardiovascular mortality declines, ACM burden continues rising paradoxically in middle-high income countries like China (200.4% case increase 1990-2021), revealing gaps in current prevention strategies”.

�Emphasized clinical significance: “Characterized by delayed clinical onset, ACM typically manifests as irreversible heart failure in middle age (45-69 years), creating missed opportunities for early intervention”.

�Highlighted public health urgency: “ACM remains preventable yet clinically overlooked, disproportionately affecting chronic alcohol users through alcohol-induced myocardial damage.”

• The results section could be more concise—it currently repeats statistics instead of synthesizing the main findings. Summarise key findings concisely.

�Consolidated global trends: “Globally, ACM burden declined significantly (22.5-37.1% decrease in age-standardized rates), while China experienced a 200.4% case increase with rising mortality/disability rates.”

�Streamlined demographic analysis: “Three key disparities persist: (1) Male predominance (male-to-female ratio 3:1); (2) Concentration in middle-aged adults (45-69 years); (3) Regional clustering in high-middle SDI areas.”

�Reframed projection summary: “Burden projections through 2036 indicate continued global declines but limited progress in China despite intervention opportunities in high-middle SDI regions.”

• The conclusion should explicitly state future research directions—such as potential interventions for ACM burden reduction. Explicitly mention the knowledge gap and future research.

�Added implementation roadmap: “Future research priorities include: (1) Precision prevention strategies for high-burden regions; (2) Early screening protocols targeting males aged 45-69; (3) Cost-effectiveness analyses of alcohol control policies in middle-high SDI countries.”

�Defined knowledge gaps: “Critical unresolved issues: China's unique epidemiological trajectory, sex-specific pathogenic mechanisms, and optimal intervention timing in pre-clinical stages.”

Proposed solutions: “Personalized secondary prevention and population-level alcohol regulation represent promising approaches requiring validation through implementation studies.”

Introduction

• The research gap and justification for a scoping review are unclear. Clearly define the research gap.

�Added explicit gap definition: “While traditional views attributed ACM solely to drinking behavior, emerging evidence highlights critical gene-environment interactions (e.g., PNPLA3/HSD17B13 variants). This scoping review addresses the unmet need to synthesize how genetic susceptibility, regional drinking norms, and demographic disparities jointly shape ACM’s global burden – a gap not systematically explored in prior literature.”

�Enhanced justification by contrasting global heterogeneity: “Pronounced geographical disparities (Eastern Europe >15/100,000 vs. Asia-Pacific lower prevalence) and high-risk subgroups (genotype-positive alcoholics, prevalence up to 40%) justify a scoping review to map evidence for precision interventions.”

• Lacks a clear hypothesis or research question. Explicitly state research questions.

�Defined three focal questions:“(1) How do global alcohol consumption shifts (e.g., rising youth drinking) temporo-spatially impact ACM burden? (2) Which age/sex/SDI subgroups face disproportionate risks? (3) How can prevention strategies leverage gene-environment interactions for precision interventions in transitional nations like China?”

�Methodological alignment: Research questions directly guide GBD epidemiological triad (prevalence, mortality, DALYs) analysis across 204 countries (Methods, section 2.1).

• Overuse of technical jargon—simplify complex epidemiological terms for broader accessibility. Reduce jargon and introduce technical terms only when necessary.

We have diligently followed the reviewers' guidance by simplifying specialized terminology and providing corresponding explanatory annotations.

Methods

• Lacks details on data validation and bias mitigation strategies. Specify validation steps for GBD 2021 data.

�Revisions Implemented (Methods Section): “GBD 2021 data underwent rigorous three-tier validation: Cross-verification: DISMOD-MR 2.1 vs source data (<15% discrepancy threshold)

�Uncertainty Quantification: 1,000 bootstrap iterations generating 95% UIs

�Expert Review: IHME clinical panel adjudication of outliers.”

• The BAPC model parameters should be better explained—readers may not be familiar with integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA). Simplify Bayesian modelling explanation.

�We have provided explanations for BAPC: “BAPC modeling: Age effects: Life-stage risk variations Period effects: Population-wide temporal shifts Cohort effects: Birth cohort lifetime risks (Computed via Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation ( INLA ), replacing MCMC to accelerate convergence from weeks to hours with<0.1% error).”

• Needs clarity on ethical considerations for secondary data usage. Clarify ethical considerations for using publicly available datasets.

�Ethical Compliance Statement: This study utilized exclusively de-identified aggregate data from the GBD 2021, publicly accessible through the (IHME) portal (http://ghdx.healthdata.org/). †Per Article 32 of the Declaration of Helsinki (2013) governing secondary analysis of anonymized public data, and in accordance with our Institutional Review Board’s exemption criteria, ethics approval was waived since no individual patient data or identifiers were accessed.

Results

• Some sections are overly statistical—less emphasis on numerical data, and more focus on interpretation and synthesis. Synthesize key results instead of listing excessive statistics.

�We have systematically transformed data-heavy sections into streamlined interpretive narratives, significantly reducing standalone statistics while preserving essential findings.

• The gender-based analysis could be more detailed—why are males disproportionately affected? Expand on gender disparities.

�We have expand on gender disparities: “Gender analysis indicates that the burden is significantly higher in males compared to females, likely stemming from differences in drinking patterns (occupational exposure/reinforcement of cultural norms) and biological risks (metabolic pathways/genetic susceptibility). Cohort studies confirm that males have a markedly elevated risk of cardiac dysfunction (HR=1.75, 95\% CI 1.60–1.92) and fatal arrhythmias (HR=1.89, 95\% CI 1.65–2.16).”

• Needs a stronger narrative flow between different sections (e.g., prevalence → mortality → DALYs). Improve flow between sections.

�We have restructured the results flow to establish a cohesive epidemiological triad narrative: Prevalence patterns → Mortality implications → DALY syntheses, with explicit bridging statements highlighting causal connections.

Discussion

• Lacks in-depth discussion of causal mechanisms behind observed trends. Expand on why ACM is increasing in China.

�We have expanded on why ACM is increasing in China: “Despite sustained lower ASPR/ASMR levels versus global and same-SDI-quintile peers with recent mild increases—indicating SDI is not the primary ACM burden determinant—this derives from a tetrad of synergistic mechanisms: consumption transition (127% per capita alcohol increase 2000–2020); high-ethanol spirits dominance >40% ethanol beverages linked to 53% cases); rural healthcare deficits (4.2% rehabilitation coverage); and genetic susceptibility (30.2% ALDH2*2 mutation frequency in males). ”

• The role of healthcare infrastructure and policy interventions in disease burden reduction is underexplored. Discuss healthcare access and intervention disparities.

�We have addressed healthcare access disparities and policy intervention gaps through substantive additions: “(1) Documented critical rural healthcare deficits with quantified metrics (e.g., <18% cardiac screening coverage in China vs. 72% in urban counterparts); (2) Analyzed policy efficacy thresholds, demonstrating sub-30% alcohol taxation fails to curb consumption (WHO-proven 20-50% rates reduce use by 16-28%); (3) Proposed precision interventions: provincial screening targets (≥50% coverage by 2025) and FCTC-aligned digital marketing bans targeting youth exposure surges (+37%).”

• The limitations section is missing—important for academic rigor. Add a Limitations Section.

We have added a limitation section: 1. Death misclassification risk: clinical diagnostic overlap between ACM and other cardiomyopathies (e.g., dilated cardiomyopathy), particularly in primary care with high misdiagnosis rates, potentially underestimating burden; 2. Alcohol exposure measurement bias: alcohol consumption estimates reliant on household surveys and tax data without correction for unrecorded consumption (e.g., homemade spirits); 3. Inadequate comorbidity control: the GBD model incompletely integrates synergistic effects of conditions like depression and liver disease, potentially distorting attribution analysis; 4. Missing policy variables: failure to quantify provincial/national alcohol policy strength (e.g., tax enforcement, advertising ban scope), constraining policy-burden association analysis; 5. Alcohol-type data fragmentation: no differentiation between spirits, imported liquors, beer etc.

Conclusion

• Needs a stronger call to action for policymakers and researchers. Explicitly state implications for policymakers.

• Future research recommendations should be more specific. Clearly outline research priorities.

�We have already revised�This epidemiological divergence underscores the urgent need to address China's accelerating ACM burden, mandating policymakers to immediately implement three-tiered actions: First, enforce progressive spirits taxation (rates ≥30%) and comprehensively block youth digital marketing channels (curbing the current 37% surge in exposure rates); second, elevate rural echocardiography screening coverage to ≥50% by 2025 (current coverage gap <18%) while implementing compulsory occupational alcohol restrictions in high-exposure occupations such as manufacturing and transportation; third, incorporate an annual ACM mortality reduction rate ≥5% into local performance assessment systems, establishing real-time monitoring of tax evasion rates. Researchers must prioritize four critical domains: establishing clinical diagnostic thresholds for ACM-predisposing genetic variants (e.g., PNPLA3/HSD17B13 loci), developing rapid biomarker detection kits, completing multicenter RCTs on digital alcohol cessation therapies, and constructing agent-based modeling (ABM) simulations for alcohol taxation policies—ultimately forging an epidemiologically-tailored prevention-control framework to accelerate achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 3.4 targets.

Reviewer #2

Please use full name for DALY the first time you use it in manuscript, regardless of your mentioning within the abstract. Please include the limitations facing reliance on GBD data, underreporting in low-SDI countries, modeling assumptions. Introduction: Please include the importance of genetic factors in alcoholic myopathy. While traditionally it was thought that alcohol-related disorders such as AFLD are only diet-related, it has now been comprehensively shown that several prevalent variation of several genes such as PNPLA3 and HSD17B13 are highly correlated with metabolic disorders and cardiovascular problems. Most importantly, PNPLA3 gene is a very important gene since it has a prevalence of ~30% worldwide, which is close to the prevalence of diabetes, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular events associated to the named diseases. I highly recommend the authors to integrate genetic part of this disorder by including recent publishings such as PMID: 40231787, so that the revised manuscript would have a more comprehensive view toward the disease.

�We have addressed all requested revisions: DALYs are now fully defined as 'Disability-Adjusted Life Years' at first use in the main text; Comprehensive limitations of the GBD data are documented in the concluding section; and the Introduction now incorporates genetic determinants of ACM pathogenesis, highlighting PNPLA3/HSD17B13 variants' significance in cardiovascular risk prevalence, supported by the cited reference 'Experimental Models to Investigate PNPLA3 in Liver Steatosis' which underscores heritable susceptibility in ACM development.

Attachment

Submitted filename: response.docx

pone.0336033.s010.docx (22.8KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Amir Hossein Behnoush

20 Oct 2025

Epidemiological trends in alcoholic cardiomyopathy burden: A 32-year global and Chinese analysis (1990–2021) with projections to 2036

PONE-D-25-11641R1

Dear Dr. Chen,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Amir Hossein Behnoush

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The manuscript has been revised significantly and the authors have improved the manuscript with the revision.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Faizul Akmal Abdul Rahim

Reviewer #2: Yes: Alireza Ramandi

**********

Acceptance letter

Amir Hossein Behnoush

PONE-D-25-11641R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Chen,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Amir Hossein Behnoush

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Global and China age-specific numbers and crude morality rates or of ACM in 2021.

    A Global age-specific morality numbers. B China age-specific deaths numbers C Global crude morality rates. D China crude morality rates; Global and China age-specific numbers and crude DALY rates of ACM in 2021. E Global age-specific DALYs numbers. F China age-specific DALYs numbers . G Global crude DALY rates. H China crude DALY rates.

    (PNG)

    pone.0336033.s001.png (812KB, png)
    S2 Fig. Joinpoint regression analysis of the sex-specific ASDRs for ACM in China and worldwide from 1990 to 2021. A.

    Global analysis; B China’s analysis.

    (PNG)

    pone.0336033.s002.png (623.6KB, png)
    S1 Table. The Burden of Alcoholic Cardiomyopathy (ACM) in 2021: Age-Standardized Rates (ASPR) and Estimated Annual Percentage Changes (EAPC) in China and Globally.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s003.xlsx (25.2KB, xlsx)
    S2 Table. Global and China age-specific numbers and crude rates of prevalence,morality and DALY for ACM in 2021.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s004.xlsx (20.2KB, xlsx)
    S3 Table. Global all-age cases and ASPRs, ASMRs and ASDRs of ACM by sex from 1990 to 2021.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s005.xlsx (21.3KB, xlsx)
    S4 Table. All-age cases and ASPRs, ASMRs and ASDRs of ACM in China by sex from 1990 to 2021.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s006.xlsx (19.2KB, xlsx)
    S5 Table. Changes in ACM DALYs according to population-level determinants of population, aging, and epidemiological change from 1990 to 2021 at the global , China and by SDI quintiles.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s007.xlsx (10.5KB, xlsx)
    S6 Table. The frontier analysis of ACM ASDRs by SDI in 2021.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s008.xlsx (26.5KB, xlsx)
    S7 Table. The frontier analysis of ACM ASDRs by SDI in 2021.

    Global and China Predicted ASPRs,ASDRs and ASMRs by EAPC models.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0336033.s009.xlsx (17KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: response.docx

    pone.0336033.s010.docx (22.8KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    This study exclusively utilized de-identified aggregate data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (GBD 2021), which is permanently hosted and publicly accessible at zero cost through the IHME data portal: https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool. No original datasets were generated in this work, as all analyzed data are openly available at the above link per IHME’s data access policy.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES